Mcavey v. Orange-Ulster Boces et al
| Colleen Mcavey |
| Orange-Ulster Boces, Jeffrey Smith, Jake Mchale and Marguerite Flood |
| 1:2007cv11181 |
| August 28, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Robert W. Sweet |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
55
OPINION re: 50 MOTION for Reconsideration re; 49 Memorandum & Opinion. filed by Colleen Mcavey. Based on the conclusions set forth above, the Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 1/17/2012) (ama)
|
|
Filing
49
OPINION re: 36 MOTION for Summary Judgment, filed by Jeffrey Smith, Marguerite Flood, Jake Mchale and Orange-Ulster Boces. For the reasons set forth on this Opinion, the Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 8/12/2011) (ab)
|
|
Filing
24
STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF CONFIDENTIALITY...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material.... (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 4/2/2010) (jpo)
|
|
Filing
16
OPINION:#98003 Based on the conclusion above, Defendants' motion to dismiss is denied. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 8/25/2009) (jfe) Modified on 9/8/2009 (eef).
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
